Rebecca Koenig Interim Senior Editorial Director | EdSurge Research
During a recent focus group conducted by EdSurge Research, a middle school media and library specialist from New York stated, “We don’t need another policy about what not to do with AI. We need a philosophy that helps teachers think critically about these tools.” This view was common among educators who participated in the "Teaching Tech: Navigating Learning and AI in the Industrial Revolution" project, which included teachers from various regions such as Georgia and Guam.
In fall 2024, EdSurge Research interviewed 17 teachers from around the world who teach third through twelfth grades. The discussions focused on their experiences with generative AI tools like ChatGPT. Many participants noted that while there are gaps in how AI is used, they preferred guidance and responsible usage over outright bans.
Some teachers were asked to design lesson plans using AI. However, this process faced obstacles when some schools had blocked access to popular chatbot websites on school devices. As restrictions increase across U.S. schools, EdSurge’s observations suggest that banning technology can create conditions for misuse rather than preventing it.
Despite challenges with access, both educators and students found workarounds. Based on these findings, EdSurge Research suggests a harm reduction approach to student use of AI rather than bans.
Harm reduction accepts that certain technologies or behaviors are unavoidable and focuses on equipping students to engage responsibly. A computer science teacher from New Jersey commented, “AI can do the task, but can students explain why it matters?” The approach aims to build capacity and mitigate risks rather than eliminate them entirely.
The concept of harm reduction has roots in public health strategies such as those used during the opioid epidemic. In K-12 education, it encourages developmentally appropriate exposure so students develop critical thinking skills related to new technologies.
Educators described working with AI as both an opportunity and a disruption. They expressed tension between curiosity about new tools and caution regarding academic integrity. A high school special education teacher from New York City said, “My students ask if they’re cheating when they use AI. I tell them — if you’re learning with it, not from it, that’s a good start.” An elementary technology teacher from Texas added, “We talk a lot about academic integrity, but no one’s defining what integrity looks like in the age of AI.”
Many districts have begun issuing guidance on AI use; however, most teachers lack clear parameters for transparency or disclosure. In response, some educators are developing their own classroom frameworks to encourage reflection on how students use these tools.
From educator feedback and research analysis by EdSurge Research three main principles emerged for applying harm reduction to AI in schools: systems transparency (including auditing contracts and normalizing open acknowledgment of AI), collaborative learning between teachers and students (rather than compliance-driven approaches), and context-specific guardrails developed with input from local communities.
A virtual school engineering teacher in Georgia noted the importance of transparency: “If the tools are already in what we use every day, pretending they aren’t doesn’t make us safer.” A literacy coach from Illinois emphasized ongoing professional development: “We can’t just give teachers a new platform and expect them to know what’s ethical. That has to be a learning process.”
Educators also stressed adapting frameworks based on local needs rather than imposing uniform rules across all classrooms or districts.
EdSurge Research concludes that while blocking access to chatbots or cellphones may reduce distractions temporarily at school, many students will still find ways to use these technologies elsewhere—often without adult guidance tailored to their developmental stage. The organization recommends approaching changes brought by new technology openly and thoughtfully within educational communities.
“...harm reduction, in educational contexts, is less about permissiveness and more about preparedness,” according to analysis by EdSurge Research.
Alerts Sign-up